Author Topic: Increase memory from 2X512M to 4 X 512M (Read 708 times)

Pollock · « **Reply #15 on:** May 04, 2005, 02:02:48 PM »

Eagl,

Is this the review.

http://www.hexus.net/content/reviews/review.php?dXJsX3Jldmlld19JRD05MzM=

eagl · « **Reply #16 on:** May 04, 2005, 02:15:29 PM »

I don't think I saw that particular review. The one I saw was published just a couple of months ago I think.

Funny thing, I can't seem to remember where I found it or what sites had linked to it, sorry. All I can clearly remember was the conclusion that cpu overclocking with A64s is more important than tweaking the last bit of speed from the memory.

StarOfAfrica2 · « **Reply #17 on:** May 04, 2005, 03:15:40 PM »

While not specifically about overclocking, I found this article very informative on the 64s. It might be "duh" stuff to some of you guys, but it was good reading for me.

http://anandtech.com/printarticle.aspx?i=2397

Overlag · « **Reply #18 on:** May 04, 2005, 04:42:22 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by eagl
Overlag,

You're funny.

And wrong.

Upping the FSB only overclocks the memory if you set the memory divider to a multiple that will run it faster than rated speed. Since you have to manually increase the FSB, manually decreasing the memory multiplier isn't exactly rocket science. Only a complete idiot would increase the FSB and assume that leaving everything else set to "auto" would work.

In some limited, retarded sense of the word "always", manually changing the default bios settings to increase the FSB will "always" overclock the memory. The obvious and general exception to this of course is the situation where the person making the manual bios adjustments necessary to increase the FSB makes the conscious decision "I do not want to overclock my memory", and completes the overclocking job by adjusting any other bios settings necessary to keep memory speeds within their design limits.

Why insist on spreading FUD and misinformation about overclocking, especially when it's clear that you don't know what you're talking about? Just say no, and quit trying to scare people with unnecessary and untrue dire predictions.

I've been biting my tongue and correcting this kind of BS at work for 2 days now, and I guess I don't have any reason to let you spread misinformation in here without a response.

you are WRONG my friend

systems run the memory at a divider of the FSB which in most cases is 200. to get the memory running at 200 the memory runs 1:1

if its 233 the memory is 233mhz ALSO there are NO BOARDS out there that will support a divider that will allow 200memory speed at 233.

A64 systems work alittle differently though. for instance a 3200 cPU running at 2ghz has a 200fsb, and a 10x multiplier to get 2000mhz, but a 10x divider to get 200. A64s dont have half dividers and each type of CPU has differnt dividers due to there inbuilt memory controler. A 2000mhz A64 will have 10x for 200, 12x for 166 15x for 133 and 20x for 100. however overclocking WILL overclock OR underclock the ram. unless you find the right settings for different dividers

IE with my example i run my 2000 at 10x240 which is 2400mhz, but have set the memory to run at /12 which makes it 200. thats my personal choice though, cos at 200 it runs at 2-2-2-8 instead of 2.5-3-3-8 at 240mhz.

maybe YOU should read up on overclocking?

ive been overlocking for years, using feon, TEC's, watercooling etc etc. I know how motherboards make different mhz values......

eagl · « **Reply #19 on:** May 04, 2005, 04:54:55 PM »

Funny, just for giggles I recently booted with my "FSB" at 250, cpu multiplier at 7, and my PC3200 memory (DDR 400, or 200mhz memory bus speed) manually turned to "pc2100", for a ratio far below "1/1" on the memory bus. I think that ratio is 2/3 so the memory was actually running at around pc2700 speeds.

This has been a very common practice for the last couple of years, where the memory bus speed has been able to be run asynchronously from the cpu bus speed enabling FSB and cpu overclocking without overclocking the memory.

Even the pci bus speed can be either locked at a specific speed, or set to a fixed multiplier of the FSB. Either way, the pci/agp bus is not necessarily overclocked when the FSB speed is increased.

Not only that, with athlon 64 motherboards you can set the HTT multiplier. In my case, I ran it at 4x, resulting in an HTT speed of 1 ghz, so even that was "within spec" even though the "FSB" was set to 250, not 200.

As a matter of fact, in this example every major component was slightly UNDERCLOCKED even though the FSB was increased by 25% over spec.

Heck in your example you prove my point. You've increased your FSB to 240, but you chose to not be a moron and changed your memory multiplier to run it at 200mhz. So increasing your FSB did NOT overclock your memory, as you so vehemently state would happen.

Stick that in your pipe and smoke it. If you don't smoke, I'm sure you can find another orifice to stick it in.

Overlag · « **Reply #20 on:** May 04, 2005, 04:56:52 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by eagl
Funny, just for giggles I recently booted with my "FSB" at 250, cpu multiplier at 7, and my PC3200 memory (DDR 400, or 200mhz memory bus speed) manually turned to "pc2100", for a ratio far below "1/1" on the memory bus. I think that ratio is 2/3 so the memory was actually running at around pc2700 speeds.

This has been a very common practice for the last couple of years, where the memory bus speed has been able to be run asynchronously from the cpu bus speed enabling FSB and cpu overclocking without overclocking the memory.

Even the pci bus speed can be either locked at a specific speed, or set to a fixed multiplier of the FSB. Either way, the pci/agp bus is not necessarily overclocked when the FSB speed is increased.

Not only that, with athlon 64 motherboards you can set the HTT multiplier. In my case, I ran it at 4x, resulting in an HTT speed of 1 ghz, so even that was "within spec" even though the "FSB" was set to 250, not 200.

As a matter of fact, in this example every major component was slightly UNDERCLOCKED even though the FSB was increased by 25% over spec.

Stick that in your pipe and smoke it. If you don't smoke, I'm sure you can find another orifice to stick it in.

thats underclocking it then so whats your arguement?

and i dont call turning 200mhz memory to 166mhz a "slight" underclock either. (edited for typin error)

yes i know about HTT, when at 250 i run at x4 which turns it back to "stock" and at upto around 245 it runs fine at x5.

im not even sure why you've got this attitude here?

eagl · « **Reply #21 on:** May 04, 2005, 05:00:06 PM »

Again, you prove my point that unlike your firmly repeated statement:

Quote

upping the FSB will overclock the ram.

it is possible to increase the FSB and at your discretion, still run the memory at whatever speed you choose. It can be overclocked, underclocked, or as in your system, left at stock speeds.

I'm baffled as to why you picked a fight over something so stupidly obvious.

Overlag · « **Reply #22 on:** May 04, 2005, 05:01:58 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by eagl
Again, you prove my point that unlike your firmly repeated statement:

it is possible to increase the FSB and at your discretion, still run the memory at whatever speed you choose. It can be overclocked, underclocked, or as in your system, left at stock speeds.

I'm baffled as to why you picked a fight over something so stupidly obvious.

your picking the fight

it will be overclocked or underclocked, or if your clever enough to find the right ratio to allow standard... as in my example where i run my cpu at 2400 with a /12 A64 divider

maybe my first post was alittle err...uninformative?

edit: and err...as you said it sounded like i ment always?

eagl · « **Reply #23 on:** May 04, 2005, 05:11:34 PM »

Since you're admitting you're wrong, then we're cool

Umm... Duel this weekend and the loser 2 out of 3 eats crow in the main forum? Settle it like men, with guns

Overlag · « **Reply #24 on:** May 04, 2005, 05:13:52 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by eagl
Since you're admitting you're wrong, then we're cool

Umm... Duel this weekend and the loser 2 out of 3 eats crow in the main forum? Settle it like men, with guns

not wrong just a "broad" example in my first post......sounding like all.

bah yeah kinda......

i mean didnt Nforce2 boards have a option for a % even? so the ram could run at whatever speed you wanted? i cant remember my last nforce2 board got alittle wet and doesnt work lol

when u wana da? i not played for a while (errr 2 days

lol) and not really a dueler as shane would tell ya, im a timid cherry picker

eagl · « **Reply #25 on:** May 04, 2005, 05:26:07 PM »

I think the nforce2 boards were the first that really allowed for flexible asynchronous memory/cpu speeds. The nature of that flexibility has changed a lot, with some manufacturers listing the options as multipliers or divider ratios, and some sticking to "standard" lables like ddr400 or whatever.

I guess the point we were both making is that it's not trivial and changing one setting may affect more than one component.

Tell ya what... I haven't flown at least half of the planes in the current planeset so you can have the first and third choice

I should be available most times from Friday evening through the weekend, wife ack permitting. Let me know and we'll rumble just for fun.

Overlag · « **Reply #26 on:** May 04, 2005, 05:32:28 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by eagl
I think the nforce2 boards were the first that really allowed for flexible asynchronous memory/cpu speeds. The nature of that flexibility has changed a lot, with some manufacturers listing the options as multipliers or divider ratios, and some sticking to "standard" lables like ddr400 or whatever.

I guess the point we were both making is that it's not trivial and changing one setting may affect more than one component.

Tell ya what... I haven't flown at least half of the planes in the current planeset so you can have the first and third choice I should be available most times from Friday evening through the weekend, wife ack permitting. Let me know and we'll rumble just for fun.

what ya fly?

i fly mostly 109s F4/g2 or g10(not that much)
190a5
zero (both models)
i rarely fly la5/7s
47s i fly the d11 mainly
38s i fly all models, though earier is nicer

i dont fly spits
i dont like f4us but am "average
i dont fly f6fs

probably be 190a5 then 47d11 i dunno lol

eagl · « **Reply #27 on:** May 04, 2005, 05:41:34 PM »

I've been flying the ki-84 since it was released, but it's a bit quirky with the flaps and all...

The early zeek is fun too.

Don't fly 109s much and don't even recognize the other thing you mentioned. I actually though it was a GV at first until I realized you were talking about P-47

I won a con tourny duel in P-47s once but that was a long time ago and our opponents spun at the merge hehe.

Er... Your choice. I'm going to bed 'cause it's late here.

Overlag · « **Reply #28 on:** May 04, 2005, 05:48:27 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by eagl
I've been flying the ki-84 since it was released, but it's a bit quirky with the flaps and all...

The early zeek is fun too.

Don't fly 109s much and don't even recognize the other thing you mentioned. I actually though it was a GV at first until I realized you were talking about P-47 I won a con tourny duel in P-47s once but that was a long time ago and our opponents spun at the merge hehe.

Er... Your choice. I'm going to bed 'cause it's late here.

UK? even better same here....

be in ya gunsites soon

Hajo · « **Reply #29 on:** May 06, 2005, 05:35:29 PM »

I'm running 2 gig of ram and loading in video setup what I can into system memory.

Using 2X1024 PC3200

And yes....over a gig is loaded into my system memory.Usually 1189 ends up in my system memory.

Game smoother.........but framerate won't improve because of that methinks. Framerates usually dependant on Card, Card Memory, and most importantly Monitor Refresh Rate. Opps almost forgot cpu.